For a given trip - Leaf shows the trip miles/kwh. You multiply that by 24 kwh - you get an estimate of range - if you drive the same way on average. But remember that the last 4 kwh of that is with battery low warning ...

I get say 3.8 m/kwh in my trip to work and back. This is without using climate one way. I go down a 900 ft hill (apart from smaller hills) and come back the same way. If I were to continue driving in the same route the same way without recharging - and the temperature remains the same - I can expect 3.8*24 = 91 miles of range - but when I hit about 76 miles, I can expect battery low.

The range display just tells you the estimate range if you drive the same way you have been driving in the past X minutes/hourse and the weather and terrain etc didn't change. Leaf can't predict your future drive - it just projects using your past records.

EVNOW,I saw your efficiency ranking today, 7.8 miles/kWh. Yowsers, how do you get your eff up so high? I'm lucky to hit 5 miles/kWh..... IF the weather is warm enough and IF there aren't any hills on my route and IF my speed is 25~28 mph and IF I hit all the signals lucky.

Hello,I was just looking at Tue Wed commutes. Exact same route (19.7 miles) at the same time of day with no acc on, 3.1 kWh consumed Tue (6.45 m/kWh) and 4.5 kWh consumed Wed (4.37 m/kWh). I'm tying to be as consistent as possible.

bowthom wrote:Hello,I was just looking at Tue Wed commutes. Exact same route (19.7 miles) at the same time of day with no acc on, 3.1 kWh consumed Tue (6.45 m/kWh) and 4.5 kWh consumed Wed (4.37 m/kWh). I'm tying to be as consistent as possible.

You've just experienced the problem solved by standardized off-road tests. It's really hard to be consistent in the real world. Some of the old-skool EVers can appear to be a bit smug, but they've learned how to drive efficiently. They've had to as earlier EVs have closer to 40 miles of usable range than our 75-100.

bowthom wrote:Hello,I was just looking at Tue Wed commutes. Exact same route (19.7 miles) at the same time of day with no acc on, 3.1 kWh consumed Tue (6.45 m/kWh) and 4.5 kWh consumed Wed (4.37 m/kWh). I'm tying to be as consistent as possible.

Even only a slightly heaver foot can cost you .5 mpkWh very easily. So your driving technique need to be EXTREMELY consistent. Not only that, but the circumstances (beyond whether you use climate control or not) of your drive need to be very consistent too.

Depending on the way I drive, and at what speed, and in what kind of traffic, can make my energy usage vary from between 3mpkwH to 3.75mpkwh, and that's just based on using SOC bars, not the silly Carwings figure or the car's display (which routinely tells me I'm getting 4.2 mpkWh).

No, but computer programs can and do have bugs. There is clearly something wrong with what CARWINGS is reporting. It remains to be seen whether it is due to incorrect calculation in CARWINGS, incorrect data design in what the car is sending, a bug in the car's firmware, or a hardware unit not transmitting data correctly.

No, but computer programs can and do have bugs. There is clearly something wrong with what CARWINGS is reporting. It remains to be seen whether it is due to incorrect calculation in CARWINGS, incorrect data design in what the car is sending, a bug in the car's firmware, or a hardware unit not transmitting data correctly.

Ray

Precisely my point. Carwings is not lying, it is only doing what it was told to do. Either the program is garbage, or the data going into the program is garbage, and so the result is garbage. Either way it is a human error somewhere in the chain, not a computer that has decided to lie to us.